WDFW will not release 'early winter' hatchery steelhead this spring unless legal issues are resolved

Rob -
You have proposed the following -

"if a river is not meeting it's escapement goals fishing should not be allowed. just to throw out numbers.

escapement not met 0 fishing
escapement met .. catch and release fishing allowed
escapement + 10% hatchery fish allowed with hatchery harvest allowed
escapement + 50% wild harvest allowed 1 per day 5 per year.. guided anglers not allowed to harvest, guides not allowed to harvest"

I find that sort of approach very interesting and it may surprise you that while the details may vary some that is exactly the sort of approach that the co-managers submitted to the feds in 2010 in an effort to establish a Puget Sound steelhead fishing plan. It is also the sort of thing that "Occupy Skagit" has been pushing for. While the co-manager plan did not include your hatchery piece abundance based thresholds for increasing allowing impacts were a central component.

Across the State the standard for setting anadromous escapement goals continues to be MSY. An glaring exception has been Skagit wild winter steelhead where the goal is 150% of MSY. It is interesting if the co-manager in the basin had used MSY as the goal (4,000) then under your example targeted wild harvest would be allowed in the recreational fishery when the run was expected to be above 6,000 adults yet when they opted for a more conservative goal folks take exception with even a CnR fishery.

As an aside if the current goals are completely BS what would your recommend?

Curt



first of all my wild fish harvest was a compromise a reasonable one however i feel that no one should ever kill another wild steelhead ever even if we hit 1000% of the escapement goal..

MSY should be thrown entirely out the window we should not expect our rivers to yield anything at all. we should adopt a new management strategy for Maximum Potential Spawning.

the hatchery steelhead thing was also a compromise I do not believe that we should allow the state or any other agency to be involved in raising hatchery steelhead for planting within our state.

use all that money and energy to raise salmon for harvest and use steelhead for conservation or northwest heritage. hatchery steelhead are a complete waste of time and resources.. I'd rather have double the hatchery coho.

my point is that steelhead are not a prolific species like salmon species are so lets put our hatchery harvest efforts where it'll have the highest yield...


as for escapement goals I think if we doubled them all we'd have a good starting point...
 
So, after reading this thread, it should be safe to assume that Mr. Allen either already has his doctorate and works for WDFW, is in a postdoc position en route to WDFW, or is currently enrolled in an accredited university attaining his PhD and you really have to give him his due for walking the talk. If not the case, well it sure seems to take a lot away from what he has had to say.

DKL


no just 30 years of listening to Biologists and kicking around the block and being acquainted with the history of the northwest and what it used to produce. and I have high expectations of what our rivers are still capable if they were allowed to.

also education gives you knowledge.. it doesn't make you smart or able to think.. Now i don't claim to be smart but i can usually see through governmental BS.

that is why i suggest that people wanting to make a difference get the education they say you have to have then get inside WDFW and work your way up.. I can think of one such individual right now. Who i think is on the right track...
 
Curt, I proposed special regs (no bait barbless hook), in the north fork Nooksack above Welcome bridge for that very reason, to protect the resident trout population and steelhead and salmon pre migrants. The WDFW told me they were already doing enough to protect those fish and did not want to limit harvest opportunity.
 
There really should be no harvest of native trout or char anywhere on the continent as far as I am concerned, at least in areas that receive any degree of fishing pressure, and particularly in the case of resident fish. Political and social pressures aside, we really need to rethink these harvest fisheries and focus on the selective harvest of salmon as a regional resource, a resource that effectively harnesses the productivity of the ocean and brings it to us. Trout and char should be categorized as non-harvestable sport fish for the simple reason that sustainable healthy populations are more valuable from an economic stand point in this capacity. Not to mention the importance that they hold in any healthy functioning watershed, probably some of which we still don’t fully understand. To me this seems to be one of the rare instances where Lichatowich’s natural economy and our economy might find some common ground.
 

freestoneangler

Not to be confused with Freestone
Fascinating... this forum is a lot like watching a dog chase its tail. One statement I've made before that cannot be disputed is; choosing not to fish over threatened stock introduces no risk whatsoever...and that is a personal choice each of us can make. Those that try and split hairs making arguments to the contrary are simply trying to justify the internal guilt they have knowing they are putting personal gratification in the wrong priority.

We can argue the hypotheses, mounds of conflicting data, suppositions, theories, opinions, and what ifs till the rivers run dry -- but nothing changes the fact that fishing them introduces risk. And, just because this is a fishing forum, does not mean the position not to fish them (threatened stock) should be disregarded.

And I still think steelhead are overrated ;).
 

KerryS

Ignored Member
so what you are saying is that we are doing everything we can and we are still losing the runs?? in that case yup stick a fork in it it's done.... sad ain't it?? like i said that's what happened down here 30 years ago I know EXACTLY how you feel and completely sympathize with you.. I have no problem with CnR seasons with rivers meeting escapement but as you say that's a rare case. In rivers that are not meeting escapement do you want to be the one to cause the last fish to die? I know I don't.
I forgot to add the sarcasm smiley to my post and apparently you were unable to recognize that. Oh well.

I suffer from three terminal diseases all in a race to see which one will kill me first. I won't be around when you catch the last one but I will do what I can while I am here to help make sure one is left for you to catch.
 

_WW_

Geriatric Skagit Swinger
Rob, just when you start to make a little sense you type this comment:
i feel that no one should ever kill another wild steelhead ever even if we hit 1000% of the escapement goal..
If you want to come off sounding like a zealot, that is your business. But do not expect to be taken seriously.

no just 30 years of listening to Biologists
Maybe I'm a little tired, I've only had one day off in the last three weeks, but it appears to me that you are NOT listening to two biologists in this very thread.

I think part of the problem here is that your reference is the Washougal, while mine is the Skagit. Both Salmo and Curt have years of boots on the ground science up here on the Skagit/Sauk and...well...the escapement numbers speak for themselves.

Earlier you posted something about sub sub sub basin management, (more zealot talk). Good luck with that! We can't even get them to do the paper work for a single basin management plan for the Skagit when we show up with scientific data, records, and scientists themselves giving the testimony!

But maybe your tactic will work. Try showing up all wild eyed and talking about no fishing year round, (cause steelhead are present year round) even with 1000% escapement, sub sub sub basin management plans, and make sure to yell a lot while you're doing it - they like that.

And while you are there, maybe you can get an answer from them where I couldn't. Not from the commissioners, the director, Jim Scott, Bob Turner at NOAA, the Upper Skagit Tribe, or anyone else connected to fish management in any capacity...How does not fishing the robust run on the Skagit help the other streams in Puget Sound recover? Simple question - nobody can answer it. Maybe you can take a crack at it.

Personally, I don't give a rat's ass whether you guys ever fish again. If that's what makes you happy, then don't fucking fish! Stay home and feel good, knock yourself out, burn your fishing shit and throw a NOT FISHING PARTY and invite all your friends.
 
Rob, just when you start to make a little sense you type this comment:

If you want to come off sounding like a zealot, that is your business. But do not expect to be taken seriously.


Maybe I'm a little tired, I've only had one day off in the last three weeks, but it appears to me that you are NOT listening to two biologists in this very thread.

I think part of the problem here is that your reference is the Washougal, while mine is the Skagit. Both Salmo and Curt have years of boots on the ground science up here on the Skagit/Sauk and...well...the escapement numbers speak for themselves.

Earlier you posted something about sub sub sub basin management, (more zealot talk). Good luck with that! We can't even get them to do the paper work for a single basin management plan for the Skagit when we show up with scientific data, records, and scientists themselves giving the testimony!

But maybe your tactic will work. Try showing up all wild eyed and talking about no fishing year round, (cause steelhead are present year round) even with 1000% escapement, sub sub sub basin management plans, and make sure to yell a lot while you're doing it - they like that.

And while you are there, maybe you can get an answer from them where I couldn't. Not from the commissioners, the director, Jim Scott, Bob Turner at NOAA, the Upper Skagit Tribe, or anyone else connected to fish management in any capacity...How does not fishing the robust run on the Skagit help the other streams in Puget Sound recover? Simple question - nobody can answer it. Maybe you can take a crack at it.

Personally, I don't give a rat's ass whether you guys ever fish again. If that's what makes you happy, then don't fucking fish! Stay home and feel good, knock yourself out, burn your fishing shit and throw a NOT FISHING PARTY and invite all your friends.

i clearly said that i had no problem with a cnr fishery on the Skagit however the Skagit is not the only steelhead river on the planet not is it the only one in Washington state not the only one in Puget Sound Now can we take that one river out of the argument???... i would however oppose any catch and kill fishery on any river regardless of it's escapement.

if we are not willing to save small creeks we are by definition not willing to save large rivers. you cannot separate the two...


Some rivers can support catch and release fisheries however not all of them can. it's very easy to understand

time to put this thread out of it's misery.... fighting over very small details does not accomplish anything for any of us...
 

bennysbuddy

the sultan of swing
I forgot to add the sarcasm smiley to my post and apparently you were unable to recognize that. Oh well.

I suffer from three terminal diseases all in a race to see which one will kill me first. I won't be around when you catch the last one but I will do what I can while I am here to help make sure one is left for you to catch.
I commend your efforts,there seems to be a lot of talk and very little action ,where steelhead are concerned !
 

Ed Call

Well-Known Member
time to put this thread out of it's misery.... fighting over very small details does not accomplish anything for any of us...
You get to decide what contribution or contradiction to add to a thread. Let those assigned decide when or if a thread gets put out of its misery. I so enjoy it when others imply, suggest or outright state what others should be doing. Much like this thread of doing things my way or not at all. Hilarious.
 
a guy can't even make a suggestion that a debate be dropped in furtherance of unity on the board... great!

no matter what I say half the board jumps down my throat...
 

David Dalan

69°19'15.35" N 18°44'22.74" E
first of all my wild fish harvest was a compromise a reasonable one however i feel that no one should ever kill another wild steelhead ever even if we hit 1000% of the escapement goal..

MSY should be thrown entirely out the window we should not expect our rivers to yield anything at all. we should adopt a new management strategy for Maximum Potential Spawning.

the hatchery steelhead thing was also a compromise I do not believe that we should allow the state or any other agency to be involved in raising hatchery steelhead for planting within our state.

use all that money and energy to raise salmon for harvest and use steelhead for conservation or northwest heritage. hatchery steelhead are a complete waste of time and resources.. I'd rather have double the hatchery coho.

my point is that steelhead are not a prolific species like salmon species are so lets put our hatchery harvest efforts where it'll have the highest yield...


as for escapement goals I think if we doubled them all we'd have a good starting point...

Ditching MSY and doubling escapement goals (which I think could only exist hand in hand) would indeed be cool.